I think people have real difficulty with the idea that these things happen over time, over huge numbers of generations. They aren't happening to individuals, an individual is not getting parts of its body "selected out" and then evolving into something else. It's just a matter of who survives and who breeds a lot. That's the selection process, in a nutshell. Those more suited to their environment will live longer and produce more offspring, so any tiny changes they possess will become more frequent in the next generation.

It's not one cell on Monday and a lion on Friday.

(February 25, 2015 at 4:07 pm)robvalue Wrote: It's not one cell on Monday and a lion on Friday.

hock:

But it has to be. I mean, if the earth is only 6000 years old and lions are 6000 years old, then evolution must have taken place that quickly. Say ... six days?

Yeah, back then the only evolution was some sort of amazing anti ageing cream called "Ever-lotion".

(February 25, 2015 at 2:16 pm)paulpablo Wrote: I haven't spoke of anything exceptionally complicated, I've given you the dictionary definition of what biological selection is, told you that an assault course does physically exist and that evolution isn't totally based on elimination.

How can I discuss other things when your foundational ideas on evolution are wrong?

Natural selection is a central concept of evolution, which is really a process of elimination.

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_selection

(February 25, 2015 at 4:07 pm)robvalue Wrote: I think people have real difficulty with the idea that these things happen over time, over huge numbers of generations. They aren't happening to individuals, an individual is not getting parts of its body "selected out" and then evolving into something else. It's just a matter of who survives and who breeds a lot. That's the selection process, in a nutshell. Those more suited to their environment will live longer and produce more offspring, so any tiny changes they possess will become more frequent in the next generation.

It's not one cell on Monday and a lion on Friday.

The problem is not with the understanding of people. The problem is with the evidence. Without having any justifiable evidence, you guys are trying to push the theory of evolution down to throats of people by the use of force. That is a bad thing.

By the way breeding is an artificial process not natural process.

(February 25, 2015 at 8:23 pm)IATIA Wrote: But it has to be. I mean, if the earth is only 6000 years old and lions are 6000 years old, then evolution must have taken place that quickly. Say ... six days?

Evolution did not happen 6 minutes ago, it did not happen 6,000 years ago, and it did not happen 6 centillion years ago. In other words, it never happened and you have no evidence to prove my argument false.

Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is the product of guesswork. It holds no real essence in terms of practical science.

Just because you say there is no evidence, it doesn't mean there is no evidence.

There is so much evidence that you could spend a lifetime going through it, you just refuse to look at it. And that's not our fault.

Have you tried going to a science forum? I'm sure they can provide you links to all the evidence you could ever dream of.

(February 26, 2015 at 6:54 am)robvalue Wrote: Just because you say there is no evidence, it doesn't mean there is no evidence.

There is so much evidence that you could spend a lifetime going through it, you just refuse to look at it. And that's not our fault.

Have you tried going to a science forum? I'm sure they can provide you links to all the evidence you could ever dream of.

I do not think anyone in these forums is better than Dawkins and there is no better defender of this theory than Dawkins. Unfortunately, Dawkins has no evidence to show Evolution is true.

Then I will leave you to your willful ignorance.

(February 25, 2015 at 7:19 am)Harris Wrote: This whole assumption is wrong. The main idea behind Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is the evolution of simple structures into complex by the process of elimination.

No, it's not. The main idea is that imperfect replication and differential reproductive success result in changes in the gene pool.

New information is generated spontaneously by mutation and recombination. The new combinations that are successful survive and contribute in subsequent generations.

---

(February 26, 2015 at 7:04 am)Harris Wrote:

(February 26, 2015 at 6:54 am)robvalue Wrote: Just because you say there is no evidence, it doesn't mean there is no evidence.

There is so much evidence that you could spend a lifetime going through it, you just refuse to look at it. And that's not our fault.

Have you tried going to a science forum? I'm sure they can provide you links to all the evidence you could ever dream of.

I do not think anyone in these forums is better than Dawkins and there is no better defender of this theory than Dawkins. Unfortunately, Dawkins has no evidence to show Evolution is true.

That statement clearly shows you have not actually read any of Dawkins's books on evolution. You probably have not read any books on evolution written by any qualified biologist.

(February 26, 2015 at 6:48 am)Harris Wrote: Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is the product of guesswork. It holds no real essence in terms of practical science.

I'm confused by this because practically all science is the product of guesswork. I mean what is a hypothesis if not a guess? How do you actually think science works?

(February 26, 2015 at 7:47 am)Chas Wrote: No, it's not. The main idea is that imperfect replication and differential reproductive success result in changes in the gene pool.

New information is generated spontaneously by mutation and recombination. The new combinations that are successful survive and contribute in subsequent generations.

Evolution's mutation mechanism does not explain how growth of a genome is possible. How can point mutations create new chromosomes or lengthen a strand of DNA?

All breeds of dog can still mate with one another. People have not seen any increase in dog's DNA, but have simply selected different genes from the existing dog gene pool to create the different breeds.

(February 26, 2015 at 7:53 am)jesus_wept Wrote: I'm confused by this because practically all science is the product of guesswork. I mean what is a hypothesis if not a guess? How do you actually think science works?

Hypothesis become theory when the scientist community test some idea by using conventional scientific methods and confirming the results as positive. However, no matter how many studies had been made and how many experiments but none has given the positive results in favour of fictitious theory of evolution by natural selection.

Trust me the day scientists would discover an authentic evidence in favour of evolution, all atheist would be dancing on the streets. However, theory of evolution by natural selection is an atheist delusion because they are trying to prove something, which is not part of nature.